Do you want your storage vendor to be proactive or retroactive?

According to this article NetApp is trying to be retroactive…

“Once up and running, there’s a Storage Availability Audit service. The retroactive audit makes sure customers are making use of the availability features built into the systems.”

Does the retroactive audit simply provide data for a ‘ root cause analysis’ review? Does NetApp have any tools that could help predict oncoming problems?

At another point in the same article I learned that the FAS2000 series is low priced and runs a lot of storage. I think this is the same unit that uses the Intel Mobile Celeron for its processor, which I learned from a NetApp customer who told me, but that is not mentioned in the article.

“Similar to NetApp’s FAS200 product line, the new FAS2000 series is designed as a low-to-mid-end storage appliance, but still sports some high end features and protocols.”

The jury of my peers is still pondering whether the Mobile Celeron is enough processor for the enterprise storage market. I suppose that the early adopters will be able to tell us soon enough.

It looks like NetApp is pricing the 2000 series products at the same price levels as their storevault product, does that make any sense?

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.